... say the Russo Brothers.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movie ... 235180430/

"A thing to remember, too, is it’s an elitist notion to be able to go to a theater. It’s very fucking expensive," Joe adds. "So, this idea that was created - that we hang on to - that the theater is a sacred space, is bullshit."

These guys are such hacks, haha.

Some more gems:

"We love everything about classic cinema, but we’ve never been precious about that in any way, shape, or form," Anthony tells the trade. "What has always excited us most is [the question], how do you move it forward? This is part of our philosophy in terms of not being precious about theatrical distribution."

"Auteur filmmaking is 50 years old at this point. It was conceived in the ’70s. We grew up on that. We were kids, it was really important to us. But we’re also aware that the world needs to change and the more that we try to prevent it from changing the more chaos we create," the director says. "It’s not anyone’s place to reject the next generation’s ideas."

Fuckin morons

They're really enjoying that Netflix check, lol.

Did they make the gray man? If so, they’re entitled to that opinion cause that was a very enjoyable flick .

kamarozy wrote: ↑

July 27th, 2022, 8:13 pm

Did they make the gray man? If so, they’re entitled to that opinion cause that was a very enjoyable flick .

Could you imagine the backlash someone like Tarantino would have gotten if he cast himself as the gay character in his movie..

I'm open for debate, I wouldn't call them morons even if I don't agree with them. I don't really have a dog in this fight, but the one thing I'm sure of is that the current model of how streaming services and their original production companies work is far from what I would call ideal.

Actually, not much from the past 130 years of filmmaking was ideal, the Hollywood studio system (or any studio system) is a very Frankenstein-like, freak and broken system where committees make films and true vision rarely comes into play, etc. We all know how it works. And the same was always true - or even moreso true - for television, even way before streaming was a thing. Ratings, ratings, ratings. You were always watching products.

But for some reason the way Netflix and other platforms are churning out these TV shows and original films labelled as unique creative visions is somehow bugging me. There is something fundamentally wrong with the current, almost fanatical trend of binge-watching new and original TV shows and TV movies, mostly for the fear of missing out. I know that this might not be that different from how things used to work before streaming, but still, there's something fishy going on here, in my mind at least...

To put it simply, it feels like nowadays you could make a film or TV show that just couldn't have been made in the old system - and I'm not sure if that's a good thing. Like, not all the time. But I might be totally wrong - I'm really just flooded by these new shows and films day by day, I log in to Netflix and see 15 new posters for original films I've never heard about, and yeah, no one has to watch any of that, but I personally feel like I'm almost being incentivized not to watch new things, because there's just so many of those. And I'm also questioning the actual originality and uniqueness of many of these projects, and the true creative vision behind them.

And also, corporations will never be your friends, and to label Netflix, let alone Disney as the harbingers of this new and great world order is definitely wrong in my eyes.

And another, probably more controversial thought: I don't think that we always have to follow new trends. Artists, especially, have to have the ability to choose the "trend" or system that suits their style, creative choices and vision the best. For some, it's streaming, for others, it's movie theatres. A director could stage Hamlet in an abandoned warehouse or a small flat just as well as in the National Theater. It always depends on what you are really looking for as a director or writer or anything. It's not like "movie theaters are a thing of the past, move on to TV, everybody", because then when everyone is only watching films in their homes, the ones who dare to premiere a film in a theater will be the pioneers. And the cycle starts again.

To be honest, the latter could very well happen, but I think this transitional period we're in right now will be much less dramatic. Theatres will stay open, streaming companies will experience a boom, then a slight recession and their user base will reach an equilibrium, and that's it, the two distinct movie platforms will live next to each other in harmony. That is my prediction.

I don't know how I feel about what they said. I think the distinction between cinema and television should be kept intact. They are two completely different experiences. Movies, regardless of their budgets are designed specifically for theaters. That's how it's always been and as someone who dreams of making their own films, that's how I want to work.

The way movies are shot, edited, mixed - all of those decisions make much more sense on a big screen with big speakers. A bunch of people all sitting in a dark, quiet room watching and experiencing the same thing together.

Not everyone can or wants to go to a theater and streaming allows them to join the fun instead of waiting months to catch up. But the amount of work that goes into movies, it makes sense that a lot of filmmakers want their movies to be seen in a certain way. Imagine putting all the work into a sound mix in Atmos or 5.1 only for it to be played on an iPad or a cheap stereo TV screen. It's not ideal. And not everyone affords a good home theater setup. but a visit to a movie theater every now and then won't break their wallet.

I decided not to seek out their film in cinemas and watched at home. I'm sure it would've been better on the big screen even though my setup as decent to say the least.

I don't really know how what they're doing is moving things forward. I'd rather see movies that are distinct and made by auteurs. People with individual voices instead of generic and bland commercial movies that are being thrown at us from studios.

Also, I think that movie theatres are elitist in this sense, but the same goes for regular theatres, or concert halls, or the creative arts and museums. But is it less elitist to demand from every household to have smart TVs or laptops or smartphones where you can watch Netflix? Isn't this the other side of the coin where the supposed "submission" to this new and "available" form of art fuels the worst industrial and corporate trends of producing millions of TVs and smartphones for people to even be able to watch streaming in the first place?

Might be an outlandish suggestion, but it kinda makes sense to me. There are artforms where you could say it's for "everyone", and everyone can tune in and take part etc, but I don't think film is one of them. You either build designated entertainment centers (movie theaters) for people to be able to watch films, or you create a wide infrastructure of families with smart appliances, and of course an industry that supplies those appliances. One can be seen as elitist, the other is... I'm not sure what it is, but it also comes with a price. And I also believe the latter can have wider ranging negative effects on societies, as we are making kids as young as 2 getting used to the proximity of smartphones and tablets.

Once again, TVs existed way before streaming, but to lash out at the culture of cinema as "elitist" makes me want to take a look at this proposed new world order that supposedly isn't.

I think many artforms are elitist, but isn't art itself "elitist" in a way that it demands some sort of intellectual or emotional state from you to be able to comprehend it in the first place? Not everyone has that apparatus, or better yet, even if everyone has that apparatus, it isn't working properly all the time. You might "get" something one time - either on an intellectual or emotional level - that just completely alienates you some other time. Art, I think, is elitist in a way by its nature - it's not for everyone, or it's not for every time. It needs to be seen and experienced at a very specific moment, at a very specific place, and those are circumstances that are beyond your conscious actions. You have to invest in art either on an educational or on an emotional level, where you have to have a certain emotional or cognitive growth to be able to even "be there" for art. That, I think, is elitism.

To be honest, I'm always suspicious of people who say that art is or should be for everyone. I'm not sure if that's true, based on my reasoning above.

Cinemas could also just lower the prices for tickets. That would make the cinematic experience more affordable and I remember a time where it was not so expensive. With something like Disney+, Netflix, HBOMax, etc. you end up paying for a whole bunch of subscriptions that aren't cheap either so if everything only gets released online you're not watching it for free or at a more affordable price necessarily because you still have to pay a hefty sum to watch everything that exists out there because it's all dispersed across a variety of different platforms that you will have to subscribe to if you want to be able to watch certain films. Certain platforms don't have certain films so that might make things even more difficult...I never had that problem because I mostly just went and bought a ticket for a movie at the cinema.

I also just value the cinematic experience because I like sitting in a big room with lots of people around watching films on a big screen instead of having to watch everything on a (by comparison) tiny tv/computer screen alone at home.

I don't get the idea that there is a 'need' for change other than to push big companies' new business models that they want to exploit so they can push the consumer to spend as much cash as possible. There's enough room for every type of experience. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Change either happens organically or companies want to push things in a way that maximises their profits but leaves consumers with little to no choice ultimately and I hate that idea.